10 Nov 2022 11:50 AM GMT
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench recently came down heavily on an 18-year-old, accused of stalking and abetting the suicide of a 16 year-old-girl. Single bench of Justice Anand Pathak made strong observations about the repercussions of stalking and voyeurism on a woman. It observed that suh acts not only harms her psyche but also sends a bad message to the society- Some...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench recently came down heavily on an 18-year-old, accused of stalking and abetting the suicide of a 16 year-old-girl.
Single bench of Justice Anand Pathak made strong observations about the repercussions of stalking and voyeurism on a woman. It observed that suh acts not only harms her psyche but also sends a bad message to the society-
Some crimes give psychic gains and some crimes give monetary gains. Here, the case is of deriving psychic gains and sadistic pleasure where applicant followed and stalked the deceased, who happens to be a 16 year old girl. Stalking, voyeurism and following any female not only causes deep embarrassment and harassment to her but also instills the sense of insecurity and lowers down her self-esteem, more prominently in feudalistic pattern of society where perpetrator of such crime treats his actions as trophy and tries to give a message to the society that he can capture his victim at will. Being driven by Stockholm Syndrome/ Helsinki Syndrome, victim at times surrenders to the perpetrator and this gives undue premium to his audacity.
As per the prosecution story, the Applicant/accused used to like a 16-year-old girl and followed her wherever she went. Being compelled by constant following and stalking, her parents sent her to the house of her maternal grandparents. Unhinged, the Applicant also reached the area where her grandparents lived. He became a source of embarrassment to the victim by following her and asking her whereabouts in the village. Feeling that she had no way out, she committed suicide. The Applicant was accused for offence punishable under Section 306 IPC and was later arrested.
Arguing his third bail application, the Applicant submitted that he used to follow the deceased because he was in love with her. He had no intentions to harass or cause her any embarrassment. It was pointed out that the charge-sheet had been submitted in the case and hence his chances of tampering with the evidence were remote. He also submitted that he would cooperate in his trial and would not interfere with the life of the Complainant. On the said grounds, he prayed that he be granted the liberty of bail.
Per contra, the State argued that the Prosecution story was substantiated by the statements of the deceased's Parents and therefore, the application was liable to be dismissed.
Examining the submissions of parties and documents on record, the Court observed that prima facie a case for abetment is made out-
Present case depicts such state of affairs where victim was chased/followed/stalked by present applicant to the extent where parents of the deceased had to shift her to different place at her grandparents house but he continued to chase her. Compelled by the circumstances, she committed suicide. Abetment, prima facie is apparent on record (for consideration of present bail application at least). No case for interference at this stage is made out.
With the aforesaid observations, the Court found the application sans merit and accordingly dismissed it.
Case Title: AMAR SINGH SEHRIA versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 253
Click Here To Read/Download Order